NDA bringing British Era land law

Farmers, activists vent ire at land acquisition ordinance scrapping consent clause
Farmers and activists have patently denounced the Centre's ordinance amending the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LARR) Act, 2013, stating that it is bound resurrect the despotism of British era, when land was acquired forcibly without the consent of land owners.
Farmer leader Vijay Jawandhia demanded to know how plots could be seized in the name of infrastructure and affordable housingwithout the acquiescence of those who own them. "The BJPgovernment has brought back the British-period law, which was abandoned by the Congress. The only thing the party kept unchanged is the compensation, which is four times that of the market price in rural areas, and two times in urban areas. This is shocking and will lead to land-grabbing. We had voted for BJP hoping for good days, not for bringing back the pre-independence exploitative British era," Jawandhia said.
The ordinance gives the central governmentthe right to acquire land for public purpose - essentially for five key sectors including security and defence, infrastructure, power, and affordable housing - without seeking consent of landowners. Earlier, the nod of 80% of landowners was mandatory, besides a fourfold compensation.
It is nothing but dictatorship, feel farmers.
Jawandhia is in favour for developers approaching farmersor landowners directly if they want to set up a factory. "The government has no business meddling in negotiations between farmers and developers. This law will create unrest among farmers, leading to Singur- and Nandigram-like incidents," Jawandhia said.
Nothing but land-grabbing
Ulka Mahajan, social activist, said that 20 years ago, textile mills in Mumbai were closed down and subsequently sold to developers on the pretext of constructing affordable housing, which remains a fantasy. "What happened? The property rates sky-rocketed instead of coming down. The common man cannot buy the dream home now. The land acquisition ordinance is nothing but grabbing of farmers' land and natural resources in the name of development," Mahajan alleged.
She also cited how hundreds of acres were acquired by industrial houses for setting up special economic zones. "What happened? In the last 10 years, no business and no adequate foreign currency came to India. The motive behind this ordinance is to gobble land. This move needs to be opposed vehemently, otherwise the country will face a serious crisis.
'May lead to agri crisis'
Mahajan said the BJP government has decided to acquire irrigated and multi-crop land as well. "This move will lead to a foodcrisis as well as and global warming due to heedless development. We have decided to oppose this arbitrary move," Mahajan added.

Problem of defining a clear cut plan is not always good if you ask me.Even if there is one. To give an analogy in Hyderabad after inner ring road was announced small mosques and temples came up literally overnight in the planned path of the road,even after so many years they are not able to remove them.Now they cause traffic issues. These mosques and temples did not come up out of religious inclinations but purely political reasons. There is no such thing as foolproof acts and laws, but issues can be resolved by keeping an eye on implementation.

this land acquisition bill is good for speedy infrastructure , and other developments.......it has ensured that the sellers will get good returns, but like many people think it doesn't force someone to sell his land, he has a right to decide.

if the person (say a farmer) doesn't want to dell his land then no one can coax him to do so.....over all it is not that evil as the congressies want to make it appear.

this land acquisition bill is good for speedy infrastructure , and other developments.......it has ensured that the sellers will get good returns, but like many people think it doesn't force someone to sell his land, he has a right to decide.

if the person (say a farmer) doesn't want to dell his land then no one can coax him to do so.....over all it is not that evil as the congressies want to make it appear.

Click to expand...

It's also good enough for others to fool people into thinking that this'll strip them of their land

Land acquisition should be streamlined, and I think government needs to have slightly more control over land acquisition, but the process of using ordinances is flawed. Like in the other ordinance thread, the government should simply avoid doing the same thing.

I remember in the other thread, Modi worshippers were supporting his ordinances and blaming the Rajya Sabha. My question to them is, do they also vehemently support the numerous ordinances of the previous Manmohan Singh government?

My take is simple - do what you want, but first pass a bill into law, and use ordinances rarely.

First of all, is this mere tweaking? The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act of 2013 (LARR 2013) replaced the colonial Land Acquisitions Act of 1894. The new law made acquisition conditional upon the consent of landowners, social impact assessment, and impact on environment and food security, besides providing for higher compensation and more humane rehabilitation and resettlement provisions.

The Ordinance does away with consent, social assessment and food security assessment in one swoop by creating five big exemptions. The first exemption, â€œDefenceâ€, has been defined to include â€œproject vital to national securityâ€ and â€œdefence productionâ€, which can include all kinds of infrastructural projects and privately owned projects. The second, â€œIndustrial Corridorsâ€ is left undefined, and could include hundreds of acres of land. Third, â€œAffordable housing and housing for the poor peopleâ€ means that any housing scheme â€˜affordableâ€™ for any section of society other than the poor is also covered here. The fourth and the fifth exemptions cover â€œRural infrastructureâ€ and â€œInfrastructure and social infrastructureâ€ in PPP mode where the land is owned by the government. Together, the last two exemptions cover roads, railways, ports, airports, mines, electricity, oil and gas pipelines, telecom towers, dams, canals, sewage, hospitals, schools, colleges, markets, cold stores, agricultural facilities, tourism, hotels above three star hotelsâ€¦

The issue is not what has been exempted but what is not covered by these exemptions. What would a greedy builder, politician or bureaucrat not be able to include under these five categories? In case they wish to do acquisition for private purposes, they have also been helped by extending acquisition to any â€˜Private Entityâ€™ that includes proprietorship, partnership, NGO etc., besides a private company. The ban on acquisition for private educational institutions and private hospitals has also been lifted.

The Act of 1894 at least provided the affected landowners the right to object and be heard. Since the Ordinance bypasses the entire procedural requirements, now the landowners would not enjoy even this minimal safeguard.

It is quite clear that the express purpose of the Ordinance is to dilute some of the pro-farmer provisions of LARR 2013. Mr. Jaitleyâ€™s reasoning â€” that the principal objective of this Ordinance was to extend the benefit of the new law to various types of land acquisitions that were left uncovered so far â€” is disingenuous. This objective could be achieved through a simple notification under Section 105 about two months ago.

What about compensation? The LARR had provided for compensation higher than the earlier colonial-era law, but much lower than the real value of the land post its land use. The Ordinance has not expressly reduced this package. But it has hurt the farmers indirectly. The removal of consent clause drastically reduces the bargaining power of landowners. The Ordinance has also dashed the hopes of those farmers whose acquisition was not completed by 2013 and who stood to receive compensation under the new Act. Besides, the exact compensation package will be determined by state rules that may take clue from the spirit of this ordinance. Haryana, for example, has already notified rules to reduce the quantum of compensation.

Congi in its appeasement mode made land acquisition almost impossible, now BJP must turn it back to a sensible balanced view that ensures fast and simple acquisition while making sure people are not ripped off.

80% of people agreeing to sell the land is utterly stupid. When has there been 80% agreement on anything in India?

There will be protests and opposition / NGO nexus will try to slow growth but none of it is really going to work as long as fair compensation is paid.